magicseaweed.com

Fukushima

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:00 pm

by flacky

surfinsmiler wrote:Don't know about this particular "figurehead" but personal experience leads me to believe that depleted uranium rounds cause cancer.I had a friend who was a member of the armed forces,Royal Artillery,attached to special forces and generally playing secret squirrels in all the last few Gulf skirmishes.Retired from active duty to pursue an academic life as a lecturer at Cambridge.Super-fit guy who suddenly noticed a lessening of his abilities he went to his GP who promptly gave him 6 weeks to live.Diagnosis of several cancers some of which were inoperable.He died after 4 weeks.I think we don;t know enough about nuclear to handle it,be it weapons or power generation.The shits just too long lived and unstable.

Just because we can, doesn't mean we should. That's my opinion on the subject, and on a lot of things in life.

You have changed the meaning of my statement by removing the inverted commas.

If you can't respond without cheating like that then don't bother.

.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:47 am

by kayu

..Nuclear energy could still be a solution to the global energy problem.......but scientists have left the job half done....typical . There is a way to neutralise the waiste , and it should be found before any more proliferation of the reactors....if they spent the money to find the solution, instead building spaceships and war toys , it would be reasonable to assume that they would find a way to neutralised nuclear waiste.......probably best to find a way to neutralise human greed and lust for power.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 2:02 am

by Roy Stuart

The current method of disposal is to spread it as fine dust all over the world in the form of spent ammunition. Hundreds of tonnes of it all over the middle east... so kind to kill over a million of the residents, force the remainder of the population to live under fascist fake democracies and civil war in a land now made virtually uninhabitable on a permanent basis due to uranium dust. The stuff is impossible to clean up.

I also deny that there is an energy problem. The only real energy problem is that energy is used to cause suffering and destruction.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 4:38 am

by kayu

Roy Stuart wrote:The current method of disposal is to spread it as fine dust all over the world in the form of spent ammunition.

That claim has been doing the rounds for some time now. Its quite possible , but I have yet to see believable evidence....

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 5:37 am

by Roy Stuart

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:06 am

by flacky

kayu wrote:.. instead building spaceships and war toys , it would be reasonable to assume that they would find a way to neutralised nuclear waiste.......probably best to find a way to neutralise human greed and lust for power.

Had a conversation with a random stranger last week. Would we as a species explore new worlds, I suggested that man reaching the moon was the pinnacle of human achievement. To stand on a rock and say"I'm going to reach that next rock" is awe inspiring. But in reality there's only so far you could travel in a human lifetime, and with no sign of a habitable other rock, the real achievement would be in saying ok, we tried, and using resources to better what we have here... Tangent, but hey ho.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 12:57 pm

by kayu

flacky wrote:

kayu wrote:.. instead building spaceships and war toys , it would be reasonable to assume that they would find a way to neutralised nuclear waiste.......probably best to find a way to neutralise human greed and lust for power.

Had a conversation with a random stranger last week. Would we as a species explore new worlds, I suggested that man reaching the moon was the pinnacle of human achievement. To stand on a rock and say"I'm going to reach that next rock" is awe inspiring. But in reality there's only so far you could travel in a human lifetime, and with no sign of a habitable other rock, the real achievement would be in saying ok, we tried, and using resources to better what we have here... Tangent, but hey ho.

The way the 'powers that be" treat this rock , I suspect they will only abuse the next one much the same , if they ever find a habitable one......it'd be like trotting of on an adventure while your house is burning.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:09 pm

by Poo Stance

flacky wrote:in reality there's only so far you could travel in a human lifetime

What is reality? How long is a human life? Nothing in this universe is impossible, if you can conceptualise it then eventually and inevitably it will come to fruition. Maybe not in your lifetime. So in theory, once we can separate space from time it should be possible to travel anywhere and any time. At least thats what the science says, and after all, it was science that got us to the moon... if your believe what 'they' say that is

Click the links and check out the 1st 3 vids. Nice to get a personal perspective.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:16 pm

by flacky

My point is when do we stop hoping and star gazing and say "you know what, let's clean this place up and forget about space".

And it's not what science says, it's what theory says. The two are not to be confused.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:35 pm

by Poo Stance

Yeah, I get your point. But why divert those resources unless vital and you know you can effect a change. The study of both terrestrial and extra have yielded gains in the others fields, so purposefully not taking any line of enquiry should be a last resort, especially if it's not certain that the alternative will provide the necessary results. Just a thought and I guess it all goes on what the 'necessary results' are.

Why is Fukushima not still a major news story? Does everyone think this problem has been solved? What is the general consensus on how much damage this event will cause?

Still scaring the shit out of me.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 12:00 pm

by WP101

Japanese tsunami plastic debris spotted in Hawaii

Jeremy Carroll, Waste & Recycling News

A plastic cube from Japan recently washed ashore in Hawaii. It is the first known piece of debris to wash ashore in Hawaii from the tsunami that rocked Japan in 2011.

A four-foot cube plastic bin is the first confirmed piece of Japanese tsunami debris to wash ashore in Hawaii, officials from the state said.

The large plastic bin was found floating in the ocean near Waimanalo, Oahu on 18 September. Officials were able to confirm the bin belonged to YK Suisan and was lost during the March 2011 tsunami.

Barnacle and crab found on the debris were not found to be invasive in Hawaii and the bin had normal radiation readings, officials said.

William Aila, chairman of the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, praised the Japanese government and officials at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for their quick work to help identify the piece of debris.

"It is encouraging that our agencies and governments are working together so cohesively in identifying potential Japan tsunami marine debris," he said in a statement.

There might be as much as 2 million tons of debris floating in the Pacific Ocean from the tsunami with the bulk of it expected to wash ashore starting in 2013.

Re: Fukushima

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:52 pm

by flacky

Read about the current leak in the USA. The site that they used to develop the bomb in the 40's, the waste is STILL being treated. And has leaked. And is still costing them to clean and "make safe".........

FUCK

NUCLEAR!

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:42 pm

by Black

flacky wrote:Read about the current leak in the USA. The site that they used to develop the bomb in the 40's, the waste is STILL being treated. And has leaked. And is still costing them to clean and "make safe".........

FUCK

NUCLEAR!

One only has to read Richard Feynmans account of his inspection of a nuclear fuel storage depot in "Surely You're joking mr Feynman" to know its a disaster waiting to happen - oh wait it already did!Here's a link with the story http://quanta-gaia.org/reviews/books/FeymanJoking.htmlEdit: Actually that's not the quote I was looking for now I read it I'll try find the right one........

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:13 pm

by Black

It is actually the first part of that plus a preamble to it, anyway the gist is he had to tell them not to store too much fuel in rooms close to adjacent walls otherwise it might go boom! All that Feynman stuff is worth a read anyway, an interesting person.

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 10:38 am

by Poo Stance

Large amounts of fallout disseminated world- wide from the meltdowns in four reactors at the Fu- kushima-Dai-ichi plant in Japan beginning March 11, 2011 included radioiodine isotopes. Just days after the meltdowns, I-131 concentrations in US precipita- tion was measured up to 211 times above normal. Highest levels of I-131 and airborne gross beta were documented in the five US States on the Pacific Ocean. The number of congenital hypothyroid cases in these five states from March 17-December 31, 2011 was 16% greater than for the same period in 2010, com- pared to a 3% decline in 36 other US States (p < 0.03). The greatest divergence in these two groups (+28%) occurred in the period March 17-June 30 (p < 0.04). Further analysis, in the US and in other nations, is needed to better understand any association between iodine exposure from Fukushima-Dai-ichi and con- genital hypothyroidism risk.

Re: Fukushima

Good "awareness" article, Roy. BUT you are an intellectual individual, I hoped that you would've looked further into where this source came from.

I did and this is what I found (this is from the original "post" of Roy's link.):

Update: August 16th, 2013

It’s been an interesting 36 hours: This website went from 200-300 visitors a day to 0ver 16,000 visitors yesterday and over 39,000 today (so far!). There have also been more comments than any other post that has appeared here, and honestly, the majority of them have been negative.

It started with the graphic that I posted. It turns out, unknowingly to me, that it was an image from NOAA that showed the Tsunami wave height that had been edited to look like the Pacific Ocean Fukushima radiation path. I’m going to look for updated information and will change the graphic and accompanying information as soon as I have time to look for it. Unfortunately, the gigantic jump in viewership crashed my site and I’ve been working on that since yesterday morning. Support and I finally figured out what had happened and I have upgraded the site to handle the traffic.

That YouTube clip on the website shows a very disturbing "spread" of some sort in the Pacific Ocean since the earth quake, but it doesn't explain what it is, nor the legend to describe what the colours indicate. Clearly there is a lack of information to understand what that clip shows. But if one uses his/her educated brain, one would wonder "how much nuclear content can you contain in a power plant (which is less than a flea's bosom compared to an entire ocean)? Surely it can't store as much to fill HALF OF THE WORLD...".

BUT having said all this, it is still a concern how wide the radiation has spread since the quake. And certainly there are national (Japanese) and international interests in this and there are groups of investigators who catch fish in various parts of the Pacific to investigate the spread of the radiation (by examining kidneys of the caught fish, apparently).

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:51 am

by Black

Don't forget the radioactive water leaking from the containment tank because someone forgot to turn the tap off!!! 2400 gallons a day - Lord preserve us as it seems the Lord is the only one who can save us from ourselves!!

Re: Fukushima

Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:42 pm

by flacky

Man created the lord as much as he created this mess, so you're right there Black...

I was dubious about that graphic when I saw it last week. However, It's not stopped me from checking where my fish is caught... I just cannot see any sane reasoning for nuclear power. If you can't contain the worst case scenario, then don't bloody do it!